• Dathknight@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    28 days ago

    This is bs …

    Instead of fighting the laws and the people behind it, ‘we’ (as in ‘the community’) infight about some minor commit?

    If the reason is data privacy, why not also remove ‘realName’, ‘emailAdress’ and ‘location’? 🙄

    • nuxi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      27 days ago

      They should also remove the phone number prompt that UNIX has had since before systemd even existed. Your phobe number is an optional part of the GECOS field and has been there for a very long time without anyone freaking out like this.

      • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        25 days ago

        It’s a slippery slope, I can’t imagine organizations won’t want more and more control over the public.

    • Skankhunt420@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      28 days ago

      As far as I can tell the Name Email and location are all voluntarily provided by the user.

      This is something that will be used whether you want it to or not (that makes it invasive) because of the laws around it (of course depending on where you are).

      Having fields I can ignore as a user isn’t the same as this guided attempt by lawmakers to eventually get you to give ID and retina scans just to use a computer.

      This is step 1. That is why people are freaking out about it.

      And I know systemd isn’t doing this out of spite, but I do wish the scene would stand up for the user more… Just say no California or whatever other shit place decides to enact that and boom problem solved. Not their fault or problem anymore.

      • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        27 days ago

        As far as I can tell the Name Email and location are all voluntarily provided by the user.

        So is birthDate.

        This is something that will be used whether you want it to or not (that makes it invasive) because of the laws around it (of course depending on where you are).

        How? First and most importantly, systemd doesn’t do anything to enforce, require or verify the field.

        Second, I control what is installed on my PC, that’s the ENTIRE POINT of using a FOSS OS. The FREEDOM to install whatever I want, or not. If there is an application that is using that field to enforce some bs law, then I simply won’t install it.

        This isn’t Windows, there isn’t a Microsoft to force you to install software updates that you don’t want. You’re FREE to not install software that does things that you don’t like. This includes any hypothetical future software that would require this field or validate this field.

        • Skankhunt420@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          27 days ago

          You control what you install on your pc and I’d be willing to bet that whatever open source OS it is, probably uses Systemd. Unless you’re a Unix person.

          They have set this up in a way that yes, right now at 11:21pm UTC on March 24th it isn’t being enforced or required.

          But because of the replies of some of the maintainers in their github about this very merge they are suggesting that as soon as it becomes hard law, it will be enforced by them.

          Particularly the part where one was replying to a system76 developer who mentioned that they are in talks with state legislators right now, that these proposed laws are very possibly going to be overturned, and that open source software might not even be required to do this at all and that we should give it more tim before we do something like this and the reply was:

          “It is possible that California law will be changed. But similar ideas are popping up in other contexts and it’s unlikely that they’ll all go away. This implementation is fairly generic and useful for other things besides age verification, so we shouldn’t decide whether to merge it or not based on a single law in any jurisdiction.”

          This suggests that they are doing this because of laws and ideas like this that are coming into play. And that they didn’t want to wait on the confirmation of whether it was law or not, they did it anyway. Why? That’s not very open. That isn’t really taking a stand to support Linux or its users that is voluntarily getting ahead of the control mechanism that “similar ideas” are going to use.

          They shouldn’t have done this. In mine, and many, many other peoples opinions as well.